98-22671 RESO
RESOLUTION NO. 98-22671
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, ADOPTING THE MIAMI BEACH
YEAR 2000 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL
REPORT (EAR) AND APPROVING THE SUBMITTAL OF THE PROPOSED
EAR BASED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS, AND
AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY ADMINISTRATION TO
SUBMIT THE EAR AND EAR BASED TEXT AMENDMENTS TO THE
ST ATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND
TO ALL OTHER REQUIRED STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL
REVIEW AGENCIES.
WHEREAS, the Growth Management Act of 1985, as amended, requires all local
governments to conduct an evaluation ofthe adopted goals, policies and objectives contained within
the local government's adopted comprehensive plan every five years; and
WHEREAS, the City of Miami Beach ("City") has prepared an Evaluation and Appraisal
Report (EAR) as required by State law and has proposed EAR based text amendments to the
following adopted components of Part II: Goals, Objectives and Policies ofthe City of Miami Beach
Year 2000 Comprehensive Plan ("Comprehensive Plan"): Future Land Use Element, Traffic
Circulation Element, Mass Transit Element, Ports, Aviation and Related Facilities, Housing
Element, Infrastructure: Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Drainage and Potable Water,
Conservation/Coastal Zone Management Element, Recreation and Open Space Element,
Intergovernmental Coordination Element, Capital Improvement Program Element, and Historic
Preservation Element; and
WHEREAS, on August 26, 1997, the City's Planning Board, sitting as the Local Planning
Agency, held a public hearing and recommended approval (by a vote of 5-0, one absence and one
vacancy) of the EAR and the proposed EAR based text amendments to the Comprehensive Plan
which recommendation included minor changes to the Traffic Circulation Element's Level of Service
standards, the addition of a policy to study the adequacy of electric service to the City, and a
modification of the Future Land Use Goal; and
WHEREAS, also included in the Planning Board's review and approval of the EAR and the
EAR based text amendments to the Comprehensive Plan are recommendations emanating from the
respective City departments' reviews of the EAR; and
WHEREAS, on November 19,1997, pursuant to Section 163.3191(4), Florida Statutes, the
City Commission held a public hearing to consider adoption of the Miami Beach Year 2000
Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) and to consider approval of the
proposed EAR based Comprehensive Plan text amendments and their submittal to the State of
Florida Department of Community Affairs and to all other required state and local governmental
review agencies; and
WHEREAS, on November 19,1997, the City Commission did not act on the EAR based
Comprehensive Plan amendments but, referred the EAR and EAR based text amendments back to
the City's Planning Board; and
WHEREAS, on December 16, 1997, the City's Planning Board, sitting as the Local Planning
Agency, again considered and approved the EAR and EAR based text amendments (by a vote of 6-0,
1 vacancy); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 163.3191(4), Florida Statutes and Rule 9J-5 of the Florida
Administrative Code, a public hearing is now required by the City Commission to make a
determination as to the internal consistency of the Comprehensive Plan, including adoption of the
EAR, approval on first reading of the proposed EAR based text amendments to the City's
Comprehensive Plan, and to determine whether to submit the proposed amendments to the State of
Florida Department of Community Affairs and to all other required governmental entities.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that
1. The Miami Beach Year 2000 Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and Appraisal Report
(EAR) is hereby adopted;
2. The submittal of the proposed EAR based Comprehensive Plan amendments to the
State of Florida Department of Community Affairs and to all other required State and local
governmental review agencies is hereby approved; and
3. The City Administration is authorized and directed to submit the adopted Miami
Beach Year 2000 Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) and proposed EAR
based text amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, as approved by the City's Planning Board, to the
State of Florida Department of Community Affairs and to all other required State and local
governmental review agencies.
PASSED and ADOPTED this 18th day of February
,1998.
ATTEST:
MA yo!ff~
_~6f~
CITY CLERK '
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
& FOR EXECUTION
F:IA TTOI TURN\RESOSIEARPLAN. RS2
dd~ fv!j);fIL-
ity Attorney
~/J'lqf
/-. r " I
Date
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
m
CITY HALL 1700 CONVENTION CENTER DRIVE MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA 33139
http:\\ci.miami-beach.f1.us
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM NO.
&;-9&
TO:
Members of the City Commission
DATE: February 18, 1998
FROM:
Sergio Rodriguez
City Manager
SUBJECT:
An Ordinance Adopting Amendments to the City of Miami Beach
Comprehensive Plan Based on the Changes Recommended in the City of Miami
Beach Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) and a
Resolution Adopting the EAR and Approving the Transmittal of the EAR and
Recommended Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan to Appropriate
Agencies and the State of Florida Department of Community Affairs.
RECOMMENDA TION
Adopt the Ordinance on First Reading Public Hearing and approve the Resolution.
BACKGROUND
The Planning Board, sitting as the Local Planning Agency, had heard this matter initially on August
26, 1997 and transmitted its recommendation to the City CommissioIl in September, wherein a
public hearing was set for October 21,1997. The hearing was opened by the City Commission on
October 21 and continued to November 19,1997. On November 19, some members of the newly-
elected Commission voiced their concern that they had not had an adequate opportunity to review
the subject documents and were not prepared to vote. Since the State Statutes require that the
Commission transmit the EAR within ninety (90) days of a recommendation by the Local Planning
Agency (the Planning Board), the matter was automatically remanded to the Planning Board to re-
commence the process.
On remand, the Planning Board again held a public hearing on December 16, 1997, and
recommended approval of the transmittal resolution and adoption of the ordinance (by a vote of 6-0,
1 vacancy), recommending approval of the EAR-based amendments as presented in Appendix "A".
On January 21, 1998, the City Commission set the public hearing for today.
AGENDA ITEM K5&
DATE 2-1 8'-3Z
The Growth Management Act of 1985 (as amended) requires all local governments to conduct an
evaluation of the adopted goals, policies and objectives contained within the adopted
Comprehensive Plan every five years. The evaluation is comprised of an analysis of each objective
and an evaluation of how the objective and its policies fulfill the requirements mandated by Chapter
9-15, F.A.C. Furthermore, the analysis assesses the consistency of the adopted Comprehensive Plan
with changes to the State of Florida growth management policies.
More specifically, the Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) addresses the
validity of the plan's projections, the realization of the plan's goals and objectives, and the
implementation of the plan's policies. The EAR also addresses changes in local conditions that
should be considered in revising the plan. It evaluates the effect on the Comprehensive Plan of
changes to the State Comprehensive Plan; changes to Chapter 163, Part II, F.S.; changes to Chapter
91-5, F.A.C.; and changes to the South Florida Regional Policy Plan.
Recommended changes to the Comprehensive Plan emanating from the findings of the EAR are
called EAR-based amendments. The City of Miami Beach EAR was prepared by the City's planning
consultant, Robert K. Swarthout, with input from the Planning, Design and Historic Preservation
Division, and was completed in May of 1996. At that point in time, the process could not move
forward because the City of Miami Beach Comprehensive Plan, as amended in 1994, had not !feen
found to be in compliance; in December, 1996, the amended plan was found in compliance, and the
City entered into a compliance agreement. Since then, the EAR has been circulated for comments
from City departments.
On August 26, 1997, the Planning Board (sitting as the Local Planning Agency), conducted a
workshop, held a public hearing and recommended approval of the EAR and proposed text EAR-
based amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. The Board's recommendation included deleting
proposed changes to the level of service standards in the Traffic Circulation Element as
recommended by the consultant; the addition of a policy to study the adequacy of electric service
to the City; a modification to the Future Land Use Goal; and other changes as proposed by certain
City departments to address errors or changes in conditions. On December 16, 1997, the Planning
Board conducted a second public hearing, as described above, and again recommended approval of
the EAR and EAR-based amendments, as further amended by the Board. The Planning Board's
recommendations are fully incorporated in a revised EAR-based Amendment presented in Appendix
"A" and summarized in Appendix "B".
PURPOSE OF TODA V'S PUBLIC HEARING
The purpose of the public hearing is to receive public comments on the EAR and on text
amendments emanating from the EAR to the following adopted components of Part II of said plan:
Goals, Objectives and Policies: Future Land Use Element; Traffic Circulation Element; Mass
Transit Element; Ports, Aviation and Related Facilities Element; Housing Element; Infrastructure:
Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Drainage and Potable Water Element; Conservation/Coastal Zone
Management Element; Recreation and Open Space Element; Intergovernmental Coordination
Element; Capital Improvement Program Element and Historic Preservation Element. (Note: Not all
of the these elements are presently proposed for amendment; moreover, the proposed amendments
do not change any designated land use categories on the existing Future Land Use Map.)
2
At the conclusion of the public hearing, the City Commission will make a determination as to the
internal consistency of the Comprehensive Plan, including the proposed changes based on the 1996
EAR, will vote to adopt and submit the 1996 EAR, and will vote to adopt the proposed changes
based on the EAR as amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan and submit them to the State
of Florida Department of Community Affairs.
THE "TRANSl\nTT AL" PROCESS FOR THE EAR AND EAR-BASED COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN AMENDMENTS
The first step in this process calls for the City Commission, upon recommendation by the Planning
Board (sitting as the Local Planning Agency), to approve the EAR and approve on first reading the
proposed amendments to the text of the Comprehensive Plan and to submit both the EAR and the
EAR based text amendments to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA), and other
affected state and local agencies. On December 16, 1997, the Planning Board recommended
approval (6-0 in favor, 1 vacancy) of the transmittal of the EAR and the required documents
amending the text of the Comprehensive Plan to the appropriate reviewing agencies (the revised
EAR-based Amendments are presented in Exhibit "A"). Within ninety (90) days of the Planning
Board's recommendations, the City Commission must adopt, or adopt with changes, the proposed
EAR and submit the adopted EAR to the State. -
The State and local agencies have a statutory time period (60 days) to review and comment on the
EAR and the proposed amendments and their consistency with the State, regional and local plans.
A report summarizing the comments of all of the commenting agencies is then transmitted back to
the City by the DCA in the form of a report known as an "Objections, Recommendations and
Comments" (ORC) report. The ORC is submitted by the DCA to the City, prior to public hearings
being held on the final adoption of the EAR- based amendments. Subsequent actions of the City
based on the EAR and EAR-based amendments must be consistent with the ORC, or reasonable
explanations for deviation must be provided, in order for the DCA to review the final actions of the
City and to determine whether those actions are "sufficient" or "not sufficient".
THE EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT
The EAR contains six (6) chapters as follows:
1. Achievement of Objectives and Implementation of Policies
2. Effect of Statute and Rule Changes
3. Condition of Plan at Time of Adoption
4. Condition of Plan at Time of This Report
5. Recommended Goal, Objective and Policy Revisions (EAR-based amendments)
6. Public Participation
(Note: Based on recommendations of the Planning Board, Chapter 5 has been revised and
is provided herein, as Appendix "A").
For ease of discussion and to help readers understand the EAR, a brief synopsis of each chapter is
provided below with an in-depth evaluation and analysis of each chapter provided within the EAR
itself:
3
1. Achievement of Obiectives and Implementation of Policies
This chapter of the EAR provides an analysis of each Objective within the current
Comprehensive Plan with an Evaluation of how the Objective and its Policies fulfill
the requirements mandated by State Statutes (9-J5), and provides additional
commentary when required.
2. Effect of Statute and Rule Chaniies
This chapter of the EAR assesses the consistency of the adopted comprehensive plan
with changes to the State of Florida growth management policies. Each local
government's comprehensive plan must be consistent with the appropriate
comprehensive regional plan and the State Comprehensive Plan. Only the changes
that have occurred since 1989 have been evaluated for this document. Changes prior
to 1989 were already considered and addressed in the current comprehensive plan.
The evaluation concludes that the City's Comprehensive Plan is in compliance with
the comprehensive South Florida Regional Plan and the State Comprehensive ptan.
However, the consultant further recommended that the City's Comprehensive Plan
be modified to incorporate transportation concurrency management techniques that
are authorized by new Florida Administrative Code Rules set forth in 9J-5.0055; the
Planning Board disagreed with this finding with regard to the Plan providing for
more lenient traffic concurrency review criteria and, therefore, voted to delete these
proposed changes to the Comprehensive Plan. As such, the Planning Board retained
the adopted Level of Service (LOS) "D" for all roads in the City.
3. Condition of Plan at Time of Adoption
This chapter of the EAR provides a description of the City and the purpose of each
element within the Comprehensive Plan at the time of adoption. This chapter is
meant to provide the lay person with a fairly good understanding of the principal
concepts on how a comprehensive plan is to function.
4. Condition of Plan at Time of This Report
This chapter provides an extensive evaluation and analysis of the Plan after the City
initiated the 1994 "down planning" changes; these changes were found to be
generally compatible with the Future Land Use Element objectives and policies.
This chapter also includes analysis regarding future infrastructure needs and an
analysis within the Intergovernmental Coordination Element regarding key issues
from various elements and the nature of the relationship among these Elements, the
responsibilities of various City Departments, the effectiveness of the existing
coordinating mechanisms, and recommendations for improved coordination, where
necessary .
4
5. Recommended Goal. Obiective and Policy Revisions
This chapter contains the proposed changes to the Miami Beach Comprehensive Plan
Goals, Objectives and Policies emanating from the findings of the EAR. These
suggested changes are shown by means of language either stricken-through or
underscored. Many of these changes were deemed necessary by the consultant in
order to make policies measurable by updating the year by which the implementation
of the policy should be completed.
Of note is the suggested change to replace the City's current adopted level of service
standards for potable water and sanitary sewer from a peak number of gallons per
day to standards which are used in the Dade County Comprehensive Plan i.e., that
the regional systems shall operate at rated (design) capacities and have the ability
to deliver specified volumes per capita permanent population per day. Since the
City's potable water and sanitary sewer systems are integral parts of the overall
county systems, it is reasonable to use the County LOS standards.
Although the Traffic Circulation Element was proposed to be amended by the
consultant to incorporate transportation concurrency management techniques tharare
authorized by new Florida Administrative Code Rules as discussed above, the
Planning Board recommended to delete those amendments. In so doing, the Planning
Board retained the adopted Level of Service (LOS) standard of "D" for all Miami
Beach roadways, with no exemptions.
6. Public Participation
Pursuant to the adopted 1994 Comprehensive Plan amendments and State Statutes,
the public participation procedures for the EAR requires that the City hold one
public hearing by the Local Planning Agency (Planning Board) and two public
hearings by the City Commission. The schedule for these public hearings has been
as follows:
A. Planning Board sitting as Local Planning Agency held its public hearing on
December 16, 1997, and made its recommendation to the City Commission.
B. On January 21, 1998, the Administration requested the City Commission to
set a public hearing on February 18, 1998, for the purposes of adopting the
EAR and to approve on first reading the EAR-based amendments and to
submit both to the appropriate government agencies, including DCA.
C. DCA has sixty (60) days (or approximately until April 17, 1998) to find the
EAR sufficient, including the EAR-based amendments, and provide findings
back to the City of Miami Beach.
Based on the above, the second reading public hearing on the EAR and EAR-based
amendments could possibly be held on May 20, 1998.
5
REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEP ARTMENTS
The EAR has been reviewed by other City Departments to determine the consistency of the
Comprehensive Plan to policies and practices in their respective areas of concern. Appendix "C"
contains suggested changes from their review, which have been incorporated into the Planning Board
recommended EAR-based amendments, presented in Appendix "A", as were earlier recommended
by the Board at its August 26, 1997, meeting and reconfirmed by its subsequent hearing on
December 16, 1997.
RELATIONSHIP OF THE EAR AND EAR-BASED AMENDMENTS TO CONCURRENCY
AND FUTURE AMENDMENTS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
As described in the Background, the State of Florida requires that each municipality prepare an EAR
of its Comprehensive Plan every five years. This is not only a statutory requirement: the EAR must
be transmitted and found sufficient by the State in order for the municipality to be eligible for further
amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. State Statute 9-J5 does allow for simultaneous EAR-based
amendments which are responsive to the findings of the EAR.
Earlier concerns have been raised with regard to the City of Miami Beach achieving Concurrency
and how this relates to both the EAR and EAR-based amendments. The Administration believes that
the City has concurrency for all level of service (LOS) issues, including the adopted LOS for the
City's roadways. Three locations have been identified, which have fallen below LOS "D" for traffic,
but mitigation plans have been proposed which will improve these road segments to LOS "D" or
better. As such, the EAR and EAR-based amendments should be approved for transmittal, as
recommended by the Planning Board.
In the short term, the Administration is requiring traffic studies for all significant development
projects and when determined necessary, prescribing mitigation measures to assure that traffic is not
degraded below the adopted LOS "D". The Commission has requested that all mitigation plans be
presented to them prior to approval. The Administration is also in the midst of developing a
Municipal Mobility Plan, awarded a contract to create an automated Concurrency Management
System and embarked on the operation of the Electrowave Park-and-Ride Demonstration Project.
The Administration has concluded that the first two efforts mentioned above need to be completed
(projected for June 1998) in order to assess more fully transportation concurrency issues in a more
comprehensive manner.
In the long term (beyond July of 1998), based on the above findings, the Administration will be in
a better position to evaluate possible amendments to the Comprehensive Plan which address adopted
levels of service and concurrency. If, for example, the City wanted to consider changing the adopted
traffic LOS for all roadways to "C", we would have sufficient data to evaluate if this change is
achievable. At that time, the City would be able to establish what kind of capital costs would be
involved to effectuate this standard, taking into consideration the State of Florida's advice that the
City may only adopt changes to level of service standards if it also commits the financial resource
to achieve all necessary improvements within five (5) years of such changes.
6
CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, the Administration recommends approval of the EAR, adoption of the
EAR-based amendments on first reading public hearing and the transmittal of the EAR and EAR-
based amendments, as amended and recommended by the Planning Board and attached hereto as
Appendix "A".
srJeM
JW11\ j Will \F:IPLAN\$ALL ICC _ MEMOSIl3l OCMS2.98
7